Prosecution Details

[1] On the 22nd day of December 2002, being a person to whom a prohibition notice was issued on 20 December 2002, and not having applied for a review of the prohibition notice pursuant to sections 51 and 51A of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984, did not comply with the prohibition notice within the time specified therein; contrary to Sections 49(5) and 54(b) of the Act.

[2] On the 22nd day of December 2002, being a person to whom a prohibition notice was issued on 20 December 2002, and not having applied for a review of the prohibition notice pursuant to sections 51 and 51A of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984, failed to cause the notice, or copy of it, to be displayed in a prominent position at or near the workplace affected by the notice; contrary to Sections 49(4) and 54(b) of the Act.

[3] Between the 17th day of December 2002 and the 24th day of January 2003, being a person to whom a improvement notice pursuant to sections 51 and 51A of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984, failed to cause the notice, or a copy of it, to be displayed in a prominent position at or near the workplace affected by the notice; contrary to Sections 48(3) and 54(b) of the Act.

The defendant operated a freight transport business from premises at Bellevue.

On 17 December 2002 a WorkSafe inspector issued a number of improvement and prohibition notices. The inspector issued a further prohibition notice on 20 December 2002.
[1] A prohibition notice was issued in relation to structural damage to concrete panels, which formed part of a large shed at the workplace. The notice provided that the panels posed a risk to employees in the event of a collapse and required that employees be restricted from entering that area until a structural engineer had assessed the structural integrity of the shed.
On 22 December 2002 the inspector returned to the workplace and found two cars which belonged to employees of the defendant parked in the vicinity of the shed. The employees stated that they were not aware of the prohibition notice and that they had permission to park their cars in the shed.
[2] A prohibition notice was not on display at the workplace when the inspector conducted his inspection on 22 December 2002. Section 49(4) of the Act requires that a prohibition notice or a copy of it must be displayed in a prominent position at or near the workplace affected by the notice.
[3] An improvement notice was issued to the defendant on 17 December 2002. The notice was not displayed at the workplace when the inspector conducted his further inspection on 22 December 2002.

The defendant was convicted under Section 136AA of the Justices Act.